Anita Busch wrote:Disney/Marvel‘s Captain America: Civil War rose about 67% on Saturday to bring in about $32.6M to $32.8M which gives us a new three-day estimate tonight of roughly $73.7M. That means in its second weekend, it will have dropped around 59%, right in line with other big tentpoles (see below). That will put the total cume at roughly $297M and soon give Disney its third $300M+ title in the Top Ten (along with The Jungle Book and Zootopia).

In comparison, Captain America: The Winter Soldier dropped 57% in its second weekend and Avengers: Age of Ultron dropped 59% while Iron Man 3 dropped 59%.

Scott Mendelson wrote:In holdover news, Captain America: Civil War continued to play like that last few big Marvel Cinematic Universe summer kick-off titles. So that means a second Friday gross of $19.44 million. That’s a drop of 74.1% from last Friday’s mammoth (and Thursday-infused) $75.253m opening day, which is par for the course of late.

The Avengers earned $29.2 million (-63%) on its second Friday on its way to a $103 million weekend, while Iron Man 3 earned $19.7m (-71%) on its way to a $72.7m second frame. Last summer’s Avengers: Age of Ultron earned $21.1m (-74.9%) on its second Friday on the way to a $77.7m second weekend.

So I guess the “bad news” is that the white-hot buzz concerning Spider-Man and Black Panther, the strong word-of-mouth, and the solid reviews didn’t move the needle all that much regarding business as usual. The good news is that we’re still talking about an eight-day total of $244.77 million with a likely $66m-$71.5m second frame.

The Avengers had a 3.5x weekend multiplier on weekend two while Iron Man 3 and Avengers 2 had a 3.68x. Iron Man 2 had a 3.44x multiplier ($51m/$15.1m) back in 2010. Thor had a weirdly leggy 3.8x in weekend two ($34m/$9.1m) and a shockingly small 47% drop to boot back in 2011, which basically makes it an outlier.

If it hits above $72.6 million, it will best Iron Man 3 to snag the eighth-biggest second weekend gross ever behind The Hunger Games: Catching Fire ($74.1m), The Dark Knight ($75.1m), Avatar ($75.6m), Avengers: Age of Ultron ($77.7m), The Avengers ($103m), Jurassic World ($106.5m), and Star Wars: The Force Awakens ($149m).

Tom Brueggemann wrote:Weekend openers "X-Men: Apocalypse" (20th Century Fox) and "Alice Through the Looking Glass" (Buena Vista) share $170-million-plus budgets and franchise status. Their box office results will reveal whether the wide swath of moviegoers who provided enthusiastic support for several familiar-yet-fresh hits so far this year ("Dead Pool," "Zootopia," "The Jungle Book" and "Captain America: Civil War") remain open to sequels that might not have the same spark.

The stakes are high this year. Atypically, two expensive high-pedigree releases are competing with each other head to head as well as facing two films ("Captain America: Civil War" and "The Angry Birds") that topped $30 million last weekend. As seen last week with three wide releases, the busy summer schedule is forcing studios to risk opening overload. So this Memorial Day isn't likely to be a top-ten record-setter (for three days, $306 million in 2013, as "Fast and Furious 6" grossed $117 million). But the weekend is likely to be closer to that figure than last year's $185 million.

"X-Men Apocalypse" got the jump by opening in much of the world (though not yet China) last weekend to over $100 million, similar to the franchise's last time out. It is the seventh "X-Men" title, with the Wolverine character played by Hugh Jackman also appearing in two other titles. It's the fourth directed by Bryan Singer (he did the first two and returned for the 2014 iteration). "X-Men: Days of Future Past," (also opening on Memorial Day in 2014) with a $110 million four day opening was a rebound for the series (total domestic gross $234 million). Adjusted though it ranked only fourth of the six core "X-Men" titles, and It faced minor competition. The second three day weekend of Sony's "Godzilla" reboot dropped two-thirds to $31 million, while the sole new title "Blended" managed only $18 million for four days.

"Alice Through the Looking Glass," a sequel to Disney's initial live-action redo of one of their animated classics, is produced, but not directed, by Tim Burton, who did "Alice in Wonderland" in 2010 to huge success (and a groundbreaking early March date). James Bobin moved in to helm after two Disney "Muppets" movies. "Alice in Wonderland" was a big risk for Disney in 2010, with a $200 million budget bet on the then-lucrative Tim Burton/Johnny Depp combo. It paid off to a $116 million opening and over $1 billion worldwide. Subsequent revamped Disney titles, with recent "The Jungle Book" the most successful, have reaped more benefits.

So both titles arrive with strong elements. The question is whether either— particularly head to head— might come in short of past achievements. For added value, "Apocalypse" has Oscar Isaac (recently of "Ex Machina" and "Star Wars: The Force Awakens") and Sophie Turner ("Game of Thrones") along with previous ensemble players Jennifer Lawrence, Michael Fassbender and James McAvoy. Mixed reviews have noted that it is a more action-oriented episode. "Days of Future Past" received more favorable notices. This marks the third Marvel event of the year, but this film is following two blockbuster hits "Deadpool" and "Civil War." Expectations are for this to open under $90 million for the three days. If It goes any higher that will be a strong sign of unabated momentum going into the heart of the summer.

"Looking Glass" scored worse reviews (Metacritic describes them as "generally unfavorable"). That combined with competition both new and recent (with families still boosting "The Angry Birds" and "The Jungle Book") should leave this lagging behind other live-action remakes and other recent Disney smashes. Worst case scenario: it should do better than "Tomorrowland," and worldwide interest (it opens most places this week) could push it to success. It will be a test of Johnny Depp's remaining appeal. His well-received crime biopic "Black Mass" managed a $62 million total last fall, but "Mordecai" and "Transcendence" flopped among his lead role films in recent years. So whether the tried-and-true route, so often successful in summers full of sequels, works once again is the key question this weekend for both films.

those allegations had as much to do with this film flopping as sexism will have to do with GB3 flopping. the real answer is, the movie wasn't very good, it was a sequel to a movie that wasn't very good either (but people didn't know it yet so it still made money), and burton/depp is played out. burton used to be one of the most creative directors in hollywood, now he just keeps making the same goofy movie with the same goofy actor (Depp) in some kind of goofy makeup. i loved burton's earlier movies, but with each movie he's become less of a director and more of a glorified production designer. every movie has gotten progressively more like a parody of the one before it. he needs to start over and do something fresh. his schtick is old. it's time for a reinvention.

Dave McNary wrote:“Out of the Shadows” earned $2 million during Thursday night preview screenings — less than half the preview take from the original “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles” and a strong indication that the premise of wise-cracking pizza-loving terrapins battling to save the Earth may be wearing out its welcome. The original film earned $4.6 million in previews on its way to a $195 million domestic gross and $493.2 million worldwide.

MATT GOLDBERG wrote:The Legend of Tarzan is also impressing at the box office. The movie made $14 million on Friday and is now looking at a four-day weekend that could come in as high as $45 million. That’s not bad considering the lackluster reviews or that Alexander Skarsgard isn’t exactly a household name. It also received an A- CinemaScore. However, the $45 million opening isn’t much when you look at $180 million price tag, so the film will definitely need some overseas help.

‘Ben-Hur’ Leads to $48 Million Write-Down at MGM“Ben-Hur” was one of the summer’s biggest box office flops and the failure of the religious epic depressed profits at Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer during the third quarter. The action-drama about a chariot

Anthony D'Alessandro wrote:Uni is experiencing a ying-yang situation this weekend. With great riches from Fifty Shades Darker and fantastic holds from Split (-26%) and A Dog’s Purpose (-18%), comes a great low from the Matt Damon Legendary fantasy epic The Great Wall which is expecting to crash stateside with a projected $16.3M over FSS and $19M over four. The movie was chiefly built for China’s great moviegoing population as well as other foreign territories that are dazzled by such flashy action epics. The financiers and producers knew they weren’t going to win the United States over with this $150M epic (which carries an estimated $110M-$120M P&A), hence the reason why they opened in China and other territories first where the movie has already amassed $225M.

When the first trailer dropped last fall, some U.S. media outlets griped over the pic’s whitewashing in lead actor Damon, who they believed appeared as a savior type to the Chinese. But that’s not how the film plays out plotwise. Furthermore, Middle Kingdom moviegoers embraced this Zhang Yimou pic so much, they spent $171M to see it. Yimou and the cast made a point to emphasize at their New York Comic-Con panel The Great Wall‘s multi-cultural efforts and attributes in front and behind the camera in addition to the powerful portrayal of women.

So, why aren’t Americans watching?

Essentially, moviegoers here haven’t gotten their heads around these new expensive East-West collaborations like Warcraft and Great Wall. Plus, as critics observed, Great Wall sacrifices great story for great action. The Wall Street Journal‘s Joe Morgenstern exclaimed, “(It) isn’t a bad idea for a fantasy, but the computer-generated monsters, like the film as a whole, are numbingly repetitive, and devoid of any power to move, scare or stir us” while New York Times’ Manohla Dargis points out, “The whole thing plays out as if it had been thought up by someone who, while watching Game of Thrones and smoking a bowl, started riffing on walls, China and production money.” Audiences who dared to shell out for Great Wall gave it a B CinemaScore, which is under the B+ that Warcraft received. Even though Great Wall isn’t based on a videogame, production-wise, it’s the closest B.O. comp.

Does The Great Wall turn a profit? Regarding the news about The Great Wall‘s sour fortunes a few weeks ago, Wanda in a statement said “the failure is fictitious.” We’ll have to wait until Uni reports their overseas ticket sales for an additional 21 territories this weekend including Australia, Korea, Russia and the UK. Rival distributors have severe doubts that the film in its entirety will be in the black. Uni limited its exposure to a reported 25% while the rest is broken up between Legendary, China Film Group and Le Vision Pictures. Distribution partners in the PROC are CFG, Le Vision, Wanda and Legendary East. Because it’s a new type of Chinese co-production with the U.S., 40% of that $171M B.O. can be brought back to the U.S. versus the usual 25%-28% rental that many Hollywood films count from PROC. But one financier tells us there’s no money in Chinese video or TV for U.S. productions. We’ll be watching this one closely. The Great Wall has been seen as a potential financial model for future China-U.S. co-productions.

Essentially, moviegoers here haven’t gotten their heads around these new expensive East-West collaborations like Warcraft and Great Wall. Plus, as critics observed, Great Wall sacrifices great story for great action. The Wall Street Journal‘s Joe Morgenstern exclaimed, “(It) isn’t a bad idea for a fantasy, but the computer-generated monsters, like the film as a whole, are numbingly repetitive, and devoid of any power to move, scare or stir us” while New York Times’ Manohla Dargis points out, “The whole thing plays out as if it had been thought up by someone who, while watching Game of Thrones and smoking a bowl, started riffing on walls, China and production money.” Audiences who dared to shell out for Great Wall gave it a B CinemaScore, which is under the B+ that Warcraft received. Even though Great Wall isn’t based on a videogame, production-wise, it’s the closest B.O. comp.

Does The Great Wall turn a profit? Regarding the news about The Great Wall‘s sour fortunes a few weeks ago, Wanda in a statement said “the failure is fictitious.” We’ll have to wait until Uni reports their overseas ticket sales for an additional 21 territories this weekend including Australia, Korea, Russia and the UK. Rival distributors have severe doubts that the film in its entirety will be in the black. Uni limited its exposure to a reported 25% while the rest is broken up between Legendary, China Film Group and Le Vision Pictures. Distribution partners in the PROC are CFG, Le Vision, Wanda and Legendary East. Because it’s a new type of Chinese co-production with the U.S., 40% of that $171M B.O. can be brought back to the U.S. versus the usual 25%-28% rental that many Hollywood films count from PROC. But one financier tells us there’s no money in Chinese video or TV for U.S. productions. We’ll be watching this one closely. The Great Wall has been seen as a potential financial model for future China-U.S. co-productions.

RelishMix noticed a divide in the social conversation for Fist Fight. Some felt in this environment of anti-bullying and teachers education issues, Fist Fight “took place in the wrong environment. To these comments, other fans are reigning down with harsh criticism, saying this looks like the funniest comedy in years. This contingent loves the R-rating, the red band trailer – and the cast. It’s just a true notable to see such impassioned discussion happening for a rated-R comedy.” Heading into the weekend, Fist Fight had its best promoters in Ice Cube (25M+ followers across Instagram, Twitter, Facebook) as well as Tracy Morgan’s 4.3M. However, viral video views of the trailer according to Relish Mix have been at an awful 5:1 –that’s the rate at which trailers for Bad Santa 2 and Whiskey Tango Foxtrot were being spread around, and those titles bit the dust at the B.O. We hear despite this snafu, New Line likes Fist Fight director Richie Keen and have already signed him to helm the action comedy Partners.

wow, i never realized so many people were interested in how Melania hooked up with Trump.

$170+ million from 4,210 theaters sounds like a lot... but just imagine how much more they would've made if that one homophobic theater hadn't refused to show the film? i'm sure the film's producers are really kicking themselves about that right now.

Seth Kelley wrote:In only the second weekend of the summer box office, the first ice-cold front approaches.

“Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” looks to continue its reign over the box office this weekend, but it’s far from the most interesting story. That title goes to “King Arthur: Legend of the Sword,” which is anticipating an opening weekend flop of epic proportions for Warner Bros. and Village Roadshow. Off of a $175 million production budget, not taking into account marketing costs, Guy Ritchie’s take on the medieval legend should make $25 million from over 3,600 locations.

Ritchie has seen box office glory in the past with 2009’s “Sherlock Holmes” ($209 million domestic and $524 million worldwide) and its 2011 sequel, “A Game of Shadows” ($187 million, $545 million). But more recently, the director saw a similar fate with his 2015 outing for Warner Bros., “The Man From U.N.C.L.E.” The film ended its run with nearly $110 million worldwide off a $75 million budget, despite receiving generally positive reviews from critics.

The same cannot be said for “King Arthur,” which was sliced and diced by the critical community, and currently holds a doleful 23% on Rotten Tomatoes. Variety‘s Peter Debruge panned the movie — which tells the story of Arthur who draws the sword Excalibur from the stone and is confronted with its power — as “just a loud, obnoxious parade of flashy set pieces, as one visually busy, belligerent action scene after another marches by, each making less sense than the last, but all intended to overwhelm.”

Perhaps some of the inevitable blame for the film’s anticipated draw can be shoved onto its star, Charlie Hunnam, who is best known for his role on FX’s “Sons of Anarchy,” and relatively untested as a movie star. The most thought-provoking point of comparison might be 2013’s “Pacific Rim,” which Hunnam anchored. The big-budget action film was widely considered a domestic bummer ($102 million by the end of its run), but scored overseas, leading to a worldwide total of over $400 million. Warner Bros. and Village Roadshow are most likely hoping for similar international traction since there seems to be little stateside.

Not to be confused with Ritchie’s 2000 Brad Pitt-starrer “Snatch,” Fox’s “Snatched” is also opening this weekend. Despite being a mid-budget R-rated comedy, the movie should give “King Arthur” (a big-budget action flick) a run for its money. Amy Schumer and Goldie Hawn star in “Snatched” as a mother and daughter whose exotic vacation goes wildly and dangerously wrong. With an early estimate in the $15 million to $17 million range, some are predicting that it will make more on faith that female-driven comedies like Kristen Wiig’s “Bridesmaids” and Schumer’s own feature debut, “Trainwreck,” are routinely underestimated at the box office. The Chernin Entertainment and Feigco Entertainment production was directed by Jonathan Levine from a script by “Ghostbusters” writer Katie Dippold.

All this to say, Disney’s “Guardians 2” should pummel its new competition on the way to a second weekend on top of the domestic box office. Even if it sees a 60% drop from its opening weekend grosses of $145 million, the sequel to 2014’s surprise hit should more than double the newcomers with around $60 million. In its first 13 days (two weekends overseas and one in the U.S.), James Gunn’s group of unlikely heroes grossed $428 million. The only race for the film now is between itself and the billion-dollar mark.

Pamela McClintock wrote:The second weekend of summer at the North American box office is taking no prisoners.

Warner Bros. and Village Roadshow's King Arthur: Legend of the Sword is a flop of epic proportions. The movie opened to an estimated $5.3 million Friday from 3,702 locations for a projected $14.5 million weekend after costing $175 million to make before a major marketing spend. It also appears to be falling on its sword overseas, where it only grossed $6.8 million on Friday from 51 markets for an early three-day foreign total of $11.6 million. In China, it opened to a mere $1.8 million to place No. 3.

Piling on more bad news, King Arthur looks to be beat in the U.S. by Amy Schumer and Goldie Hawn's Snatched in a surprise upset. The Mother's Day action-comedy earned an estimated $5 million Friday from 3,501 theaters for a $16 million-plus opening. Fox spent a relatively modest $42 million to make the R-rated movie, but was certainly hoping for more, considering Schumer's Trainwreck debuted to $30 million in summer 2015.

Overall, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 will easily stay atop the chart in its second weekend with $60 million or more from 4,347 theaters. The Disney and Marvel sequel grossed $16.4 million on Friday, more than King Arthur will in its entire weekend, unless the movie finds Excalibur. Globally, Guardians Vol. 2 will finish Sunday with well north of $500 million globally.

King Arthur, helmed by Guy Ritchie and starring Charlie Hunnam in the titular role, is a dark origins story about the future king's tough upbringing in the back alleys of the city. But once Arthur pulls the sword from the stone, he is forced to acknowledge his true legacy. Jude Law, Astrid Berges-Frisbey, Djimon Hounsou, Aidan Gillen and Eric Bana also star.

The film — whose release was delayed numerous times — was skewered by critics, but received a B+ CinemaScore from audiences. Males made up nearly 60 percent of the audience.

Snatched, produced by Chernin Entertainment, follows a mother and daughter who find themselves trying to escape after being abducted on vacation in Ecuador. The R-rated comedy, earning mediocre reviews and a B CinemaScore, marks Hawn's first turn on the big screen in 15 years, as well as Schumer's first film since Trainwreck.

Anthony D'Alessandro wrote:Really, how does a major studio spend $175M on a potential new franchise, and completely go bust at the box office?

After arguably eight years of starts and stops through various iterations, Warner Bros. has finally opened King Arthur: Legend of the Sword, the feature adaptation of a classic IP they’ve been so desperate to make, and to disastrous box office results of $14.3M stateside at 3,702 theaters and embarrassing reviews (27% Rotten Tomatoes rating). King Arthur is expected to fall third behind Disney/Marvel’s second weekend of Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 at $61.9M (-58% with 10-day cume of $245M, 39% ahead of GOTG at same point in time), and 20th Century Fox/Chernin Entertainment’s R-rated Amy Schumer-Goldie Hawn movie Snatched with $16.5M. Warner Bros. shares some brunt of King Arthur‘s cost here with Village Roadshow who has been having a terrible streak after its co-financing on Ghostbusters, In the Heart of the Sea and Passengers.

In the current marketplace of haves and have nots at the B.O. where other studios envy Disney’s treasure trove of brands, Warner Bros. was determined to revive the King Arthur legend on the big screen, to the point of overthinking it.

Audiences showed little interest in King Arthur the last time he was brought to the screen 13 years ago in Jerry Bruckheimer’s Disney production ($120M negative cost, $51.9M domestic, $203.6M global), so why even try again?

It’s easy to blame King Arthur: Legend of the Sword‘s bombing on Warner Bros.’ overindulgence in classic IPs for the screen, and goodness knows, they haven’t won over moviegoers, i.e. Red Riding Hood ($42m negative cost, $89M global), Pan ($150M cost, $128M global), Jack the Giant Slayer ($195M cost, $197.7M global), etc. But King Arthur‘s failure goes far beyond being adapted from an antiquated tale, not to mention that old properties when intriguing and even sexy can work: Disney’s Oz, the Great and Powerful‘s near half billion at the B.O.

Some would also like to point the finger at hiring fresh-face Sons of Anarchy star Charlie Hunnam in the title role of King Arthur, but still, in this day and age we know it’s the brands that are bigger than the stars, and great untested actors rise to the occasion of a great movie, i.e. Daniel Kaluuya in Get Out, Russell Crowe in Gladiator, and arguably Jennifer Lawrence in Hunger Games. In fact, 47% of those who bought tickets last night came out for Hunnam, giving the movie an A- CinemaScore, while 51% came out because they enjoy King Arthur movies, giving it a B+.

But many sources tell Deadline that if there’s any blame to go around for Legend of the Sword’s disaster, it’s the post-Jeff Robinov era administration on the Burbank lot (preceding now president-chief content officer Toby Emmerich) who per one close source “didn’t care about storytelling and ham-fisted” this King Arthur together with Guy Ritchie, a filmmaker known more for flash over substance. In fact, given the number of versions that King Arthur went through, there were plenty of opportunities for Warner Bros. to get this right. At one point, higher-profile stars were considered: Colin Farrell as King Arthur and Gary Oldman as Merlin. Many say that King Arthur‘s fate might be different in a Robinov-led studio given the former boss’ razor-sharp filmmaking sensibilities and finesse in steering directors.

While there are several credited on the Legend of the Sword script, many say it is Ritchie and Lionel Wigram’s version that made it to the screen. “He’s stylish and he needs to get a better producer,” remarked one insider on Ritchie’s second overspend here following his 2015 bomb The Man From U.N.C.L.E. ($75M negative cost, $110M global B.O.). “Who’s advising him?,” commented another. “Why would he go backwards with an old property like King Arthur? He’s very talented, they should hand him an established property like a DC movie.” (Ritchie’s next film is Disney’s live version of Aladdin). King Arthur‘s lofty costs began after an early cut of the film failed to test well. “It was a train wreck,” says one personal publicist with knowledge of the situation. This prompted reshoots with some post production departments working over the last two years on King Arthur.

Sure, it’s always easy to yell at the studio marketing division whenever a movie goes sideways, but in the case of King Arthur, it was an uphill battle for the WB pros who’ve opened multiple DC superhero movies and Harry Potter films. Ritchie’s King Arthur is filled with imagery we’ve soon too often before from Lord of the Rings, Braveheart and Clash of the Titans. At times it’s a quiet, dialogue-driven PBS period movie with understated performances, then a confused mess of flashbacks, including cameos by Voldemort’s snake, the Lord of the Rings elephants, and a knight who looks like Immortan Joe from Mad Max. There were few assets here to hook audiences.

And despite WB distribution jumping King Arthur around the calendar four times, the reality is that there isn’t any date that could be considered prime for this film. If anything you can say that the Warner Bros. development suite lingered too long on the movie to the point where it’s too late for its time. When the studio shelled out $2M after a bidding war for David Dobkin’s Arthur & Lancelot in June 2011, HBO’s Game of Thrones was nearing the end of its first season. Given how that series became the benchmark for solid medieval fantasy, why would fans of the genre leave their homes and spend $15 at the multiplex?

Hindsight being 20/20, here’s how King Arthur‘s march to the big screen went down. In August 2009, WB and Legendary labored for months to get the film rights for John Boorman’s cult classic Excalibur so that Bryan Singer could remake it. That film never came to be. By June 2011, WB took to Dobkin’s take which he was poised to direct with Lionel Wigram, Richard Suckle and Charles Roven producing and Jeff Kleeman serving as EP. The pic was originally budgeted at $90M and was eyeing a March 15, 2013 release. Dobkin’s King Arthur was something that those under 25 could hang their hats on: About a younger generation sizing up an older generation. Arthur was a reluctant young hero in pulling the sword out of the stone in an oppressive kingdom akin to a 1942 Gestapo-run Warsaw. Arthur then becomes the most wanted man in the kingdom, with a group of rebels rallying around him to be king. The project was greenlighted and fell apart twice, during the Robinov and Greg Silverman administrations. Kit Harrington was to play Arthur with Joel Kinnaman as Lancelot. By December 2011, WB balked at the project: the pairing were unproven screen commodities and the film’s production cost surged to $130M. Three months later, the project was alive with Colin Farrell as Arthur and Gary Oldman as Merlin, but those talks dried up. Also in the mix at the studio during the summer 2011 was a Ritchie version of King Arthur with Trainspotting‘s John Hodge writing. That also didn’t materialize.

Dobkin went off and made The Judge. By the time that film wrapped, Warners had changed its mind on his version, and fell in love with Joby Harold’s King Arthur pitch which was to span several sequels, each focusing on a different Camelot character in an Avengers-Star Wars universe-sense with all the characters ultimately coming together in one movie. One insider tells us that Warner Bros. executives were blown away by Harold’s vision; the project’s fantasy beast artwork was a cross between 300 and Clash of the Titans. Deadline was informed that Harold’s vision never materialized in Ritchie’s final cut. By January 2014, King Arthur was becoming a reality with Ritchie behind the camera and writing alongside Wigram. With all of these different versions of Arthur floating around, and producers hopping between projects, one source tells Deadline that the situation was “incestuous,” resulting in the Writers Guild auditing both screenplays, only to realize that the studio was folding one into the other. In the end, Wigram, Ritchie and Harold are credited as the screenwriters, Harold also received a story by credit and Dobkin earned story and EP credits. By August 2014, Ritchie selected Hunnam to play Arthur.

“They wanted to corner the brand and own it,” says another insider about Warner Bros.’ hastiness to bring King Arthur to the screen. Given the entire headache that ensued from the various iterations of King Arthur, one can see why studios are now taking a writers’ room approach to franchises like Transformers, Godzilla vs. Kong and the WB Animation group. “The desire for studios to form these new brain trusts – they just want to get things done faster, everyone is so hungry to nail the brand,” says one lit agent.

In the end, another executive informed us that the final test scores for Legend of the Sword were quite high. If that’s the case, it explains the pic’s glowing B+ CinemaScore tonight (however Screen Engine/PostTrak shows a lackluster 78% total positive). The one demographic who enjoyed the crowd were 18-24 year olds who gave King Arthur an A-, but they only repped 14% of the CinemaScore crowd. On PostTrak, there was a strong turnout by men at 57%, with 78% over 25. CinemaScore a similar skew with 59% guys, 77% over 25.

The next shoe to drop for Warner Bros. among its risky, dusty old IP feature adaptations is The Jungle Book: Origins which arrives on Oct. 19, 2018, more than two years after Disney’s near $1 billion B.O. success with its live action remake of its Rudyard Kipling-sourced animated toon. And though logic prevails that WB should end its streak of classic titles, one producer says don’t blame the property, blame the filmmaker. Great films come from emotionally captivating scripts and characters.

Says the producer, “I don’t buy that theory that old IP never works at the box office. Old IP is the most valuable sh*t in the world. Sure, God bless original stuff, but these classic brands are timeless. Just look what Jon Favreau did with The Jungle Book. It’s what you want from a Hollywood movie: The kid grows up before your eyes. Just when someone says you can’t make a great pirates movie, someone kicks down the door and does it, or Ridley Scott resurrects the sword and sandal movie with Gladiator. Of course, you can always go back.”

Anthony D'Alessandro wrote: Memorial Day weekend at the box office — remember when it actually use to have some significance?

Ever since Sony moved the start of summer to the first weekend in May with 2002’s Spider-Man ($114.8M), it has arguably never been the same, with bigger films launching in the first corridor of the month and sucking up all the air at the B.O. (case in point: This weekend, Disney/Marvel’s Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 looks to beat Paramount’s Baywatch for second place with an estimated $20.4M over 3-days and $26.6M over 4-days in its fourth frame).

However, the problem with this holiday stretch in recent years isn’t because moviegoers have abandoned it for beaches and barbecues, rather it’s due to the lackluster product that’s out there from offbeat I.P. to dull Nth sequels –i.e. Prince of Persia, Tomorrowland, Alice Through the Looking Glass, Baywatch and the blase turnout for X-Men: Apocalypse and now this year’s Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales which at a $230M negative cost before P&A is coming in well below its $80M-$85M projections with $62.3M over 3-days and $76.3M. Each year we stand here and look ahead thinking next year’s goods is going to reverse this soft Memorial Day trend. Fingers crossed for Disney/Lucasfilm’s Han Solo Star Wars anthology movie next year.

Let’s start with Pirates: Even though stateside this is the lowest opening of the series, charting below the fourth installment On Stranger Tides ($90.1M), by the time Sunday arrives, I hear Disney will be fine with this movie on a global basis, which looks to come in between $250M-$260M. The pic’s buckling here in U.S./Canada stems strictly from — what’s new? The movie in its marketing looks exactly like the other four titles which are all a blur plot-wise, and the only film the critics love in the franchise is the first one at 79% fresh. Dead Men Tell No Tales has 32% which is equal to On Stranger Tides‘s RT score, both the lowest for the franchise. Disney never bothered to fix this franchise in the same way that they ensure that Marvel, Lucasfilm, and their animated fare win over both audiences and reviewers. What’s going on here with Dead Men Tell No Tales that distinguishes it from its predecessors and makes it a want-to-see? Story-wise, it sure isn’t Jack Sparrow’s Spectre. Those buying tickets seem to have no regrets, giving it an A- CinemaScore, which is higher than the B+ of On Stranger Tides, and in line with the second title Dead Man’s Chest and At World’s End. Disney is expecting a pop tomorrow from family matinees.

But again, Pirates will win overseas, and in building this ship, Disney knew that, and probably was bracing for domestic to under-perform. After On Stranger Tides came up short with the lowest domestic total in the series at $241M (and this sequel likely lower), Disney propelled that fourthquel to an amazing $1.045 billion take. China is the market that will get Dead Men Tell No Tales over its hump as Nancy Tartaglione pointed out in our curtain raiser, and it definitely helps that Disney held the world premiere there, the first ever for a Hollywood title. The fifthquel is a fresher franchise abroad in burgeoning cinematic markets, and that’s what the upside is here.

Dead Men Tell No Tales drew 51% men to 49% women. Those under 18 at 20% gave the movie an A. Forty percent came out for Johnny Depp per CinemaScore, grading it an A-, while 42% came out for subject matter and 38% for type of movie, which indicates that Pirates fans came out for this.

On the bright side for Disney this weekend, Beauty and the Beast will become the eighth title in domestic B.O. history to cross $500M, and by Sunday, GOTG2 will have officially beaten its predecessor’s U.S./Canada total ($333.1M).

Baywatch isn’t bailing out Paramount after an atrocious 2017 at the domestic B.O. that includes xXx: The Return of Xander Cage, Monster Trucks, Rings and Ghost in the Shell. Tracking had this movie over 5 days in the $40M range, maybe even hitting $50M, and this Dwayne Johnson-Zac Efron combo is going to come in with $26.1M, just a tad higher than the three-day for Neighbors 2:Sorority Rising ($21.8M opening/$55.4M domestic). Baywatch is close to twice the price of Neighbors 2, which carried a negative cost before P&A of $35M.

So after the Super Bowl spot, all the rah-rah at CinemaCon, the fun-hysterical trailers, why did Baywatch sink? Some attribute it to how TV properties have become harder to adapt for the big screen, the last casualty being Dax Shepard’s low budget version of CHiPs at $18.6M domestic, but even riskier was that Paramount took a general audience action series from the 1990s and turned into an R-rated movie. But the biggest oversight by Paramount according to sources is that they sold Baywatch primarily to women in its beefcakes of Johnson and Efron and not the guys. Remember, Baywatch was always a guy show, its poster girl being Pamela Anderson. So where’s the poster girl, here?

Filing fourth is 20th Century Fox’s Alien: Covenant with an estimated $12.3M over 3-days (-66%) and $15.3M over four for a running total of $62.1M by end of Monday.

Pamela McClintock & Rebecca Ford wrote:The reboot — the first title in the studio's new monsters-themed Dark Universe — is projected to gross $11 million or so Friday, including $2.6 million in Thursday previews, for a dismal $30 million to $32 million domestic debut. The Mummy is off to a stronger start internationally.

CHRIS CABIN wrote:With the release of Transformers: The Last Knight, we are supposedly seeing the release of the final film in the franchise to be directed by Michael Bay, the pale king of modern empty-headed movie spectacles. It’s also easily the most idiotic film in the series, and runs at an unmerciful two-and-a-half hours, which is shorter than Age of Extinction but in the same realm as Dark of the Moon. I don’t imagine that these are the reasons that The Last Knight is currently looking at an estimated $62 million opening weekend, which would be the most meager opening for the franchise to date, but there is something to be said for an audience simply losing interest in franchise, even after sticking it through four films that in total are about the length of the entire last season of Fargo.

There is a silver lining here, however, and it speaks to the growing reliance on foreign box office prospects over domestic ones. In China, The Last Knight has already amassed $41 million on its opening day, which is well over half of what Bay’s movie is projected to make over five days in the states. This is good news for Bay and Paramount, but probably not great news for American audiences who are becoming more easily fatigued by franchises. If a movie as extravagantly stupid and unspeakably convoluted as The Last Knight can make back its frankly outrageous budget via the foreign box office, there will be a shift to promote more abroad and continue to release these empty and astoundingly expensive entertainments rather than try something vaguely new to capture the American audience. The foreign BO, for better or (mostly) worse, is now becoming the savior of the American movie studios unoriginal, risk-averse production schedule more than ever.

Nancy Tartaglione wrote:Contrary to domestic, Paramount’s Transformers: The Last Knight is on track to top the opening of Transformers: Age Of Extinction at the international box office. Although the studio is not providing an update today, as Friday estimates came in late yesterday (see below), the unofficial Saturday in China puts the Michael Bay pic at about $93M there so far.

That sets it up for an FSS Middle Kingdom bow of around $130M (including previews). Elsewhere, it should add on roughly another $50M through today and tomorrow to bring the total in 41 markets to the $220M neighborhood. These are not official numbers, but based on the earlier play, are a reasonable ballpark.

In 2014, Age Of Extinction opened to $183M in like-for-like markets and at today’s exchange rates. That film had topped Transformers: Dark Of The Moon by 35% at launch. China, as well as general overseas growth, accounted in part for the increased performance.

Domestically, The Last Knight is on track to take in about $40M+ for the three-day and is looking at a $63.9M five-day, which would be the lowest opening in the series of five films, per my colleague Anthony D’Alessandro.

With regard to China, some industry sources saw it coming in much lower ahead of the weekend, but it is stomping on screens — almost 167K showings today, per Ent Group, as compared to just 11K for the No. 2 title, Alien: Covenant. Age Of Extinction opened to $92M in China in 2014 and there has been considerable growth in the market since.

T5 has a 4.9 score on reviews site Douban compared to Age Of Extinction‘s 6.6; audiences are giving it a 7.4 on ticketing site Maoyan while Age Of Extinction was at 7. Hollywood tentpoles lean towards a 2-2.2 multiple in the PROC, which would see Last Knight fall below TAOE‘s final tally in non-restated dollars. The last pic made $320M there — although local currency will ultimately be seen as the measure. Last Knight has some runway with no major studio movie hitting the market until Despicable Me 3 on July 5.

China, Korea, Russia and some smaller South East Asia hubs led the Friday play. We’ll have a full update and analysis tomorrow which will provide clearer optics on Optimus and the gang’s first weekend out with Last Knight.

Rob Cain wrote:It used to be that a Transformers movie release in China would inspire amazed and incredulous reactions to its awe-inspiring box office feats. For weeks after the debut, fans and analysts would marvel at the latest installment’s record-smashing numbers.

Transformers: The Last Knight is having the same impact this week, but for all the wrong reasons. Its 82.2 percent plunge today from the previous Friday’s $54 million opening (including midnight grosses) to just $8.5 million (RMB 58 million) today is the most spectacular Friday-to-Friday drop I can recall for a wide release in China.

If its daily numbers keep crumbling the way they have, The Last Knight will struggle to make it to $240 million over the course of its PRC release. That may sound like a big number, and it would indeed rank as one of the biggest totals ever for a Hollywood release in the PRC, but even so it would still qualify as a catastrophic shortfall from pre-release expectations. A $240 million Last Knight Middle Kingdom total would equate to a 25 percent decrease in revenue from the last Transformers film, Age of Extinction, which pulled in a then-record $320 million in 2014. The 25 percent drop in the context of China’s overall 50% market growth during that three-year period make The Last Knight’s collapse all the more impressive.

By way of direct comparison, Transformers: Age of Extinction experienced a 60 percent drop from its first Friday to its second. That's about what can normally be expected for films of its scale and genre.

I don’t have access to enough detail from China’s movie history to definitively mark Last Knight down as the worst second-Friday performance ever, but I can offer a few other benchmarks to highlight the sheer magnitude of the Michael Bay sci-fi-actioner's plunge.

In North America, where data is more readily available, I’ve been able to identify only 5 wide releases of 2,000 screens or more that saw bigger Friday-to-Friday drops than The Last Knight.

These include the Ben Affleck-Jennifer Lopez bomb Gigli, which fell 85.3 percent on its second Friday from a $1.45 million opening day on the prior Friday. The 2009 remake Friday the 13th fell even a bit more, 85.5 percent from its $19.3 million debut. In 2002 Star Trek Nemesis suffered an 83.6 percent drop, and just this past weekend the Tupac Shakur bio-pic All Eyez on Me suffered an 85 percent second-Friday collapse.

Most interestingly, the 2010 low-budget horror flick The Devil Inside crumbled by 83 percent from its $16.8 million Friday debut on 2,551 screens to just $2.7 million on the following Friday. But I doubt the filmmakers lost any sleep over it. Their little $1 million budget film wound up grossing $53 million domestically and another $48 million overseas. We should all be so lucky.

Nancy Tartaglione wrote:Also notable this weekend, Warner Bros/DC’s Wonder Woman powered past the $700M worldwide box office threshold with a bigger $709.6M than was estimated Sunday. The Amazon warrior held well in her 5th frame, and has lassoed $363.4M overseas with Japan still on deck. Brazil has continued to be a strength for Diana Prince.

Disney’s Pirates Of The Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales also crossed $700M globally, aided by a strong two-day debut in Japan which is typically a huge market for the series. Through July 2, the film reeled in $710.6M worldwide, including $545M international — up from the Sunday call. That lifts the Pirates franchise to over $4.4B worldwide.

Deadline July 4, 2017:Can ‘War For The Planet Of The Apes’ Conquer The Summertime Franchise Blues? – Advance B.O. Forecast

Anthony D'Alessandro wrote:On tracking, Apes is expected to log a three-day in the high $50M range, potentially cracking $60M. But rival distribution chiefs are quite bullish that the film could blow those expectations away with a domestic opening between $70M-$80M. That fervor is spurred by War‘s early reviews which hit Rotten Tomatoes at 94% fresh.

Should War open to $72.6M-plus, which was the domestic debut for its the 2014 installment Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, it would rep the series’ best opening ever. Rise of the Planet of the Apes opened to $54.8M six years ago, and it’s quite conceivable that War can beat that figure.

On tracking, Apes is expected to log a three-day in the high $50M range, potentially cracking $60M. But rival distribution chiefs are quite bullish that the film could blow those expectations away with a domestic opening between $70M-$80M. That fervor is spurred by War‘s early reviews which hit Rotten Tomatoes at 94% fresh.

Should War open to $72.6M-plus, which was the domestic debut for its the 2014 installment Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, it would rep the series’ best opening ever. Rise of the Planet of the Apes opened to $54.8M six years ago, and it’s quite conceivable that War can beat that figure.

Assessed one rival distribution czar over the weekend about War, “It is destined for a broader audience and there looks to be something very compelling here.” War director Matt Reeves, who also helmed Dawn, mentioned at a 20th Century Fox product reel in December that he was influenced by westerns and Apocalypse Now in making his latest Apes. Fox has raised interest for War over the past year with clips shown at New York Comic-Con and CinemaCon.

Statistically speaking, a threequel logging the best opening out of a series’ first three titles isn’t out of the ordinary, and if you look around there have been a number of titles which have accomplished just that, i.e. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban ($93.7M), Iron Man 3 ($174.1M), Captain America: Civil War ($179.1M), and The Bourne Ultimatum ($69.3M), an older skewing guy title which is more of a comp for Apes (Dawn drew 58% men, 55% over 25).

Should War‘s Rotten Tomatoes rating maintain its high level, it will outstrip that of Rise of the Planet of the Apes (81% certified) and Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (90% certified fresh).

But herein lies the sobering reality: It’s been a bad time for non-superhero sequels at the B.O. Despite Fox’s Alien: Covenant notching a Rotten Tomatoes of 71% fresh, which wasn’t that far from its predecessor Prometheus, it didn’t send a stampede into auditoriums and the Ridley Scott-directed title missed its $40M-plus opening with a $36M three-day. While great Rotten Tomatoes scores are necessary for any tentpole to succeed at the B.O, here was a glaring example in Alien: Covenant where great reviews didn’t impact tickets sales for the better.

“The marketplace we are in does not support a $70M opening,” countered one tracker to the looming War fever. Further supporting that insight is last July’s tentpoles. Despite nabbing great reviews, Sony’s Ghostbusters at 73% fresh didn’t wow in its initial FSS with $46M and Paramount’s threequel Star Trek Beyond opened to $59.2M, the lowest for the millennial reboot despite having similar reviews to Into Darkness (84% certified fresh). Star Trek Beyond ended its domestic run at $159M — far from enough for a film that cost a reported $185M before P&A and churned a $50.5M loss after all ancillaries counted per financial sources.

The difference? War has better reviews than all the titles mentioned above. In addition, many are already commenting on the power of War‘s legs. The one title according to many that will be hurt the most by War, no matter if the threequel opens in the high $50Ms, $60Ms or $70Ms, is EuropaCorp/STX’s Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets which follows Apes on July 21 and is vying for the same older male audience. That pic hit tracking last week with a forecast of $20M to Warner Bros.’ Dunkirk‘s $35M.

Deadline July 2, 2017:‘The House’ Gets Demolished With $8.7M Opening: The Unfunny Business About Comedies At The Box Office

Anousha Sakoui and Reade Pickert wrote:Sony Pictures Chairman Tom Rothman downplays forecasts that the new “Spider-Man” movie will open with sales of $100 million or more this weekend. But it sure needs to.

The Culver City, California-based unit of Sony Corp. is in seventh place at the box office, a lowly spot the studio hasn’t occupied since 2000. And “Spider-Man: Homecoming,” Sony’s sixth film about the Marvel superhero, represents the company’s best chance to create a mega hit and lay the foundation for action films scheduled out to 2019.

“It’s as important as any film they have released in the past 10 years,” said Jeff Bock, senior box office analyst at Exhibitor Relations Co. “It is the last major franchise they have.”

After starting 2017 with a $1 billion write-off and the departure of Michael Lynton, who led the Tokyo-based company’s U.S. film, TV and music businesses, Sony’s entertainment unit needs to start making hit films again. Last year’s “Ghostbusters” revival failed and was followed by disappointments including the star-studded “Passengers.” Rothman, 62, came in more than two years ago after a hacking scandal toppled former studio chief Amy Pascal.

“Spider-Man: Homecoming” marks a chance to get back in the right direction. The picture starring 21-year-old Tom Holland could debut with sales of $122 million in North America this weekend, analysts at BoxOfficePro.com said. Sony is offering a more conservative $80 million.

The movie generated $15.4 million from its night of previews, according to the studio, shy of the $15.6 million “Iron Man 3” registered, to be the sixth-biggest tally for Marvel from early Thursday showings. Sony shares slid 0.3 percent to close at 4,245 yen in Tokyo on Friday.

Rothman, who came to Sony from 20th Century Fox, has reason to be cautious. Many studios’ well-known series have failed to meet expectations this year and U.S. moviegoers are showing signs of fatigue with superhero sequels. While “Spider-Man” has been one of the most popular film characters from the comic book world, the most recent movies haven’t measured up.

The first “Spider-Man” in 2002, starring Tobey Maguire and directed by Sam Raimi, was an unqualified hit, garnering upbeat reviews and global sales of $822 million on a production budget of $139 million, according to Box Office Mojo. By the last picture in 2014 -- the second featuring Andrew Garfield -- reviews had turned mixed, the budget had swelled past $265 million, according to the Hollywood Reporter, and ticket sales totaled $709 million.

Marvel’s Role

For this go-round, Sony turned to Walt Disney Co., recruiting the president of its successful Marvel division, Kevin Feige, as a producer. The company agreed to weave Spider-Man into a larger Marvel storyline featuring many superheroes, while Disney won rights to use the character in movies of its own. Disney retained merchandising rights and could benefit from toy sales linked to the movie.

And costs have come down: the budget for the new film was $175 million, according to Sony.

“It was very much run like a Marvel Studios production,” Feige told reporters in April.

Success would put future Sony superhero films on firmer ground. These include a 2018 release based on the character “Venom,” featuring Tom Hardy, along with an animated Spider-Man. The studio also plans a feature with female leads based on Black Cat and Silver Sable. As part of the deal with Disney, Feige will produce a Spider-Man sequel due out in 2019. Pascal, a producer on “Spider-Man: Homecoming,” will be part of that effort, too.

The new Spider-Man continues a story introduced in last year’s Disney movie “Captain America: Civil War,” which brought in $1.15 billion in worldwide. It will extend through next year’s “Infinity Wars” and possibly another Avengers movie.

Holland’s introduction “began a trajectory of excitement that started over a year ago,” said Paul Dergarabedian, senior analyst at ComScore Inc.

Peter Parker

“Homecoming” finds Spider-Man’s alter-ego Peter Parker in high school in Queens, living with Aunt May, played by Marisa Tomei. Joined by Robert Downey Jr. as billionaire Tony Stark/Iron Man, Spider-Man takes on the evil villain Vulture, played by Michael Keaton. “Spider-Man: Homecoming” generated 93 percent positive reviews, according to aggregator Rottentomatoes.com, the second best in the series.

That will be good news to Sony Chief Executive Officer Kazuo Hirai, who has been at the Culver City studio a lot this year after naming Anthony Vinciquerra to replace Lynton as Rothman’s boss. Hirai has been publicly emphatic Sony is committed to its entertainment group.

Sony’s Slate

While stuck in seventh place, Sony has had a modest success this year with the heist movie “Baby Driver” and could have a hit with the “The Emoji Movie,” due July 28. The first of a new series of Stephen King adaptations, featuring Idris Elba and Matthew McConaughey in the “Dark Tower,” is scheduled for next month. Other remakes are also on the horizon, such as “Flatliners” and “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle.”

And the studio is contending for future rights to the “James Bond” movie series. Sony generated $3.17 billion in worldwide box-office sales with the previous four spy films, going back to 2006’s “Casino Royale.”

With parent Sony Corp.’s diverse businesses spanning electronics and video games, as well an entertainment, a single movie won’t make or break the company. But “they really need a win here,” said Paul Sweeney, Bloomberg Intelligence analyst.

To compete in the global film market, Sony will “have to have a recurring number of tentpole franchises that you can bring out every year,” Sweeney said. “Two or three bankable franchises that you can go back to every couple years and you try to get lucky with some of the other ones.”

Anthony D'Alessandro wrote:4th Update, Midday Friday: “It’s definitely going over $100M, there’s no way the wheels are falling off this one.” Those are the words of a wise rival distribution executive on the expected results for Sony/Marvel’s Spider-Man: Homecoming which on the low end is looking at a three-day of $105M. That’s bound to be the third best debut for both a Sony release and a Spider-Man movie following 2007’s Spider-Man 3 ($151.1M) and the original 2002 film ($114.8M). Some even see Homecoming busting past $112M, possibly even hitting $120M, but it’s still too early to call those figures. Today alone, Homecoming looks to clear between $42M-$45M with last night representing 34%-37% of that figure.

We hear that Homecoming won’t face the slowdown that impacted Despicable Me 3 last weekend where Friday numbers were high then fell off. A lot of that had to do with families being distracted by the July 4th holiday. And it’s for that very reason why the sixth Spider-Man is opening here, and why Marvel has slotted Ant-Man and The Wasp post Independence Day next year: To avoid any July 4th monkey wrenches. Homecoming is a fanboy film, with some potential family audience built in during matinees. It will be interesting to see how frontloaded business is on this Marvel title. Homecoming is running about 5% ahead of Wonder Woman at the same time and slowly widening the gap (she ended day 1 with Thursday previews at $38.2M). Plus Homecoming had $4.4M million more in previews than her $11M. Sony is seeing $99M, but we hear that there’s too much love out there from audiences for Homecoming.

This Spider-Man cost before P&A a similar amount as other titles in the Marvel Cinematic Universe: $175M. That’s over a third cheaper than Sony’s previous title in the franchise, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 which even with combined theatrical P&A and production costs of $430M saw a profit of $70M-plus after all global TV and home entertainment monies were counted.

Neil Turitz wrote:So, we’re halfway through the Summer Movie Season, and, as mentioned last week whilst discussing the virtues and benefits of Edgar Wright’s little slice of cinematic cotton candy, we’re stuck in the doldrums here. The box office is lackluster at best, with major, proven entities coming up lame, and poorly marketed comedies not picking up the slack.

Sure, there are a couple bonafide winners here, like the aforementioned Baby Driver, and the two superhero movies, Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2, and Wonder Woman, and Pirates 5 did enough foreign business to potentially lead to a sixth installment, thus carrying on the tradition of letting us see Johnny Depp’s slow, gradual slide into irrelevance played out on a grand scale every third summer or so, but those aside, disappointment abounds.

If this is the midterms section of the season, we’re looking at a D, and that grade is right on the precipice of a D-minus. Maybe even an F. And do you know why?

Because we’re bored. We are bored to tears of the same old, same old. The studios keep shoving these giant tent poles down our throats and, while the foreign audiences still seem to be digging them (especially China), more and more we’re responding with a giant shrug. I wouldn’t say we’re madder than hell, and we’re not going to take this anymore, but we certainly are indifferent as heck, and we’re only going to do this for another little while before we throw up our hands, say, “Meh!” and stop showing up entirely.

It’s why the lesson of Baby Driver is an important one: we do want original content that isn’t necessarily tied to the same old IP’s. Shared Universes are a great idea in theory, but less so in actual practice. That’s one of the reasons why The Mummy failed, because it was so busy building a reality that it didn’t spend enough time telling a cohesive story. Which is why it’s going to lose almost $100 million for Universal.

It’s also why nobody really cares about a Transformers universe and a Bumblebee origin story, or whatever, especially since so few people showed up for the new Transformers flick, which was a solid disappointment. So, too, was Cars 3, as was this past weekend’s Despicable Me 3, both of which came in well under expectations. We’ve got a new Spider-Man movie coming out this weekend which should do some solid business, but if we’re going to make any predictions, I think it’s probably prudent to come in a few million lower than whatever the highest projections might be.

It’s worth mentioning again that there are only five movies thus far to clear $100 million domestically this summer, and while Despicable Me 3 will get there next week, and Spidey will do it pretty quickly, too, this summer’s total is going to be less than last summer’s 15. A lot less. We can come back in a couple months and see what the final total is, but taking a peak at the release schedule, I’ll go on a limb and say that War for the Planet of the Apes, Dunkirk, and Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets all have legitimate shots to join the club, with anything else being something of a shock. That makes 10.

The last time there were that few $100 million films in a summer? That would be 2005. Yikes.

Now, I know what you’re going to say: “But, Neil, Bubby, what about the original studio comedies that have failed, like Snatched, and Rough Night, and The House? All of those were original content films, all studio movies, what happened there, Mr. Smart Guy?”

Well, in order, Amy Schumer is talented, but — as we have previously discussed in this space — not a movie star draw, and there’s no reason to spend $42 million on a comedy starring her and Goldie Hawn. Spend half that amount, and that movie breaks even. Rough Night comes from Columbia Pictures, which has been on a rough spell and has been so focused on launching Spider-Man: Homecoming, that this movie got lost in the marketing shuffle, while The House is a New Line film that — as we have also discussed previously in this space — Warner Bros.’ publicity department had little interest in pushing. (Also, there’s the fact that Will Ferrell is not the draw he used to be, but that’s less important for these purposes than pointing out the failures of the studio which released the movie and, essentially, allowed it to fail.)

Also important, pointing out the success of films like 47 Meters Down, Megan Leavey, and It Comes at Night, not to mention indies like Beatriz at Dinner, The Big Sick, The Lovers, The Hero, and The Beguiled, most of which have not cleared $5 million domestically, but all of which are judged on an entirely different scale than the studio flicks at the top of the box office grosses list.

All of which is to say that the audience on whom the studios have been counting for so much of its overblown tent pole fare just isn’t showing up, because it is suddenly aware that these things being offered as new and exciting are really all stuff that we’ve seen before. Over and over again, in fact, and we’re exhausted. We are suffering from Franchise Fatigue, and it’s not like the prescription is more cowbell.

This isn’t just starting this summer, either. Go back to last year, and there are plenty of lower cost, original content films that came out and did outstanding business, like Central Intelligence, Bad Moms, Sausage Party, Don’t Breathe, Lights Out, and The Shallows.

Yes, last summer’s blockbusters did better business than this year’s, but the trend was at least in sight a year ago, so it’s not like anyone can say this snuck up on us. It didn’t. It’s been coming for a while now. People like me have been talking about this and warning the studios about it for ages, but the studios haven’t been paying attention because they’ve been too busy burying their heads in the sand and saying, “No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no! It’s not true because I don’t want it to be true because this is the way we’ve been doing it for so long that we don’t know how to do it any other way and don’t want to relearn how even if it kills us and destroys the business we’re in because we’re just that stubborn!”

It’s possible that the second half of the summer could surprise us and come up with enough hits to balance things out, but don’t count on it. Truth be told, it’s just too late to save 2017. It might even be too late to save 2018, in fact, what with release schedules and slates set so far in advance. That’s a shame, but all hope isn’t lost quite yet. There is still 2019, 2020, and beyond, all of which are still redeemable. All the studios have to do is look at what’s happening and adjust course. Rethink a couple of those questionable IP choices and replace them with interesting and engaging original ideas from talented filmmakers who know how to tell entertaining stories. Let the audience know that it is being heard, that its desires to see things it hasn’t actually seen before will be met, that its patronage is not only key, but also the very lifeblood of the industry, and its will is not being ignored.

The question is, are we actually going to learn anything from this? One can hope, of course, but then we remember exactly with whom we are dealing, and that the studios don’t take lessons nearly as well as the rest of us do.

Still, hope does spring eternal. Ideally, it will be rewarded, but I’m not holding my breath.

lazy ass article that is out of touch with the reality of the genre movies that are out and coming out this year. they hang their hat on the failure at the box office of Transformers, while dismissing the successful movies so far this year, and ignoring the highly rated movies coming out this weekend and after that are already VERY highly rated AND part of franchises. seriously, why post this fucking tripe? bot.....

Last edited by Peven on Sat Jul 08, 2017 11:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

Rebecca Ford, Borys Kit, and Carolyn Giardina wrote:Humdrum numbers leave some brands in question, with lower budgets and younger casts likely for those that return.

The mixed box-office bag for this summer's tentpole films is forcing studios to revisit their strategies for keeping individual franchises going.

Spider-ManEven before Homecoming hit theaters, Sony ordered a sequel for July 5, 2019, with Jon Watts now in negotiations to return as director.

The sequel will spin out of the events that unfold in Marvel’s Avengers: Infinity War (May 4, 2018), which also will star Holland.

But the real test will come as Sony expands its Spider-Man universe without Marvel's help. Venom (slated for release on Oct. 5, 2018) shoots this fall with director Ruben Fleischer and star Tom Hardy; and the female-superhero-led Silver & Black (which doesn't have a release date yet) will be directed by Gina Prince-Bythewood. The studio is convinced that emphasizing Homecoming's high school setting was key to the reboot.

"It’s a trap to mistake extra bombast for heightened emotion,” says Sony Pictures Motion Picture Group chairman Tom Rothman. "Even huge spectacle, absent of great characters, is ultimately numbing. Making the audience care is a lot harder than making things blow up."

TransformersThe fifth installment, The Last Knight, opened to a series low ($69.1 million in its domestic debut over the Fourth of July holiday weekend). While it has seen more action abroad for an international gross of $392.4 million, it is still expected to be the lowest-grossing entry in the Transformers franchise to date, and has only earned $517.3 million worldwide in four weeks.

Now, Paramount is cutting costs. Its Bumblebee spin-off is pegged at $70 million-plus (according to sources), compared to Last Knight's $217 million.

A younger cast, headed by Hailee Steinfeld, 20, will be directed by Travis Knight when filming starts in August. The story, centered on the yellow bot, will be set in 1987.

"We are trying to please the fans and also give them a new experience," says producer Lorenzo di Bonaventura. "Plus, there’s a new audience introduced to the franchise every 10 years, and we have an obligation to that new audience."

Wonder WomanBy waving a feminist flag, director Patty Jenkins breathed new life into the DC universe. Wonder Woman has earned $765 million to date, and not only earned critical praise, but, eight weeks in, boasts the best hold of any superhero film in more than 15 years at the North American box office.

Warner Bros. quickly started negotiations with Jenkins for a sequel (star Gal Gadot already has signed on for multiple DC films), which it will officially unveil July 22 at Comic-Con.

AlienRidley Scott's Alien: Covenant dropped 71 percent in its second weekend, and has earned $232 million worldwide. Sources say Fox will have to reassess two intended sequels Scott has pitched while he is off helming Getty kidnapping movie All the Money in the World and then drug lord drama The Cartel.

The MummyDespite the film's lackluster performance ($389.6 million worldwide to date), Universal is moving forward with its monster-filled Dark Universe, but slowly, to allow for more script development. The stories will be tied together by Russell Crowe’s Dr. Jekyll.

Convinced Tom Cruise saved Mummy from being a bigger flop, the studio is betting on names, prepping an offer to Angelina Jolie for Bride of Frankenstein (slated for release on Feb. 14, 2019) and polishing the script for Van Helsing, aimed for Channing Tatum. Johnny Depp is attached to star in The Invisible Man.

Planet of the ApesThe current trilogy has run its course as War for the Planet of the Apes opened lower domestically ($56 million) than its predecessor. But while director Matt Reeves has moved on to Warners' The Batman movie, he is still interested in returning for a spin-off based on one of the other apes.

"The whole idea of Bad Ape is that there are other apes out there, and those apes don’t have the benefits of Caesar's leadership. The conflicts of the future are not going to be humans and apes, they will be apes and apes," Reeves told THR. "I wanted to seed that idea because I thought there were a lot more stories and there are characters that I have grown to love."

CarsCars 3's $54 million domestic opening was a franchise low, and there are no official plans for a sequel, though Disneytoon Studios (which made the Planes films), planning an untitled movie about fighter jets for 2019, isn't giving up on anthropomorphic transport. At the D23 convention on July 14, the studio debuted some early footage that had a feel similar to Top Gun.

Fast & FuriousWith The Fate of the Furious' $1.2 billion worldwide gross, the franchise appears impervious to fatigue. So it’s no wonder that the studio is chugging ahead with the ninth (April 19, 2019) and tenth (April 2, 2021) installments and exploring a spin-off movie that would star Dwayne Johnson and Jason Statham.

Despicable MeAlthough Despicable Me 3, which opened on June 30, is trailing behind Despicable Me and Despicable Me 2 in box-office revenue (at press time it had earned $191 million in North America and $625 worldwide), Illumination Entertainment is already well on its way to extending its popular, $3.3 billion franchise with Minions 2, which is slated to arrive July 3, 2020.